lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2023 13:56:07 +0000
From:   <Daniel.Machon@...rochip.com>
To:     <petrm@...dia.com>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
        <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        <Lars.Povlsen@...rochip.com>, <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
        <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <joe@...ches.com>,
        <error27@...il.com>, <Horatiu.Vultur@...rochip.com>,
        <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>, <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/6] net: dcb: add new common function for
 set/del of app/rewr entries

 > Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com> writes:
> 
> > Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com> writes:
> >
> >> In preparation for DCB rewrite. Add a new function for setting and
> >> deleting both app and rewrite entries. Moving this into a separate
> >> function reduces duplicate code, as both type of entries requires the
> >> same set of checks. The function will now iterate through a configurable
> >> nested attribute (app or rewrite attr), validate each attribute and call
> >> the appropriate set- or delete function.
> >>
> >> Note that this function always checks for nla_len(attr_itr) <
> >> sizeof(struct dcb_app), which was only done in dcbnl_ieee_set and not in
> >> dcbnl_ieee_del prior to this patch. This means, that any userspace tool
> >> that used to shove in data < sizeof(struct dcb_app) would now receive
> >> -ERANGE.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
> 
> ... though, now that I found some issues in 3/6, if you would somehow
> reformat the ?: expression that's now awkwardly split to two unaligned
> lines, that would placate my OCD:
> 
> +               err = dcbnl_app_table_setdel(ieee[DCB_ATTR_IEEE_APP_TABLE],
> +                                            netdev, ops->ieee_setapp ?:
> +                                            dcb_ieee_setapp);

Putting the expression on the same line will violate the 80 char limit.
Does splitting it like that hurt anything - other than your OCD :-P At
least checkpatch didn't complain.

/Daniel

> 
> (and the one other).

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ